Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Cadiz Inc. (CDZI)

Awarener score: 4.0

Conclusion

The higher the Awarener score, the more bang you get for the buck. It measures how much genuine funds the company generates for the stock price paid (Poor), the business stability (Excellent) and growth (Average), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Very poor).

Note: All scores range from 1 (worst) to 10 (best). Conclusions are updated daily with closing stock prices and new reported quarterly financial statements.

Revenue score: 7.5

  • Business has been growing at a low pace. It's been below average when measured against peer companies.
  • Cadiz Inc. business trend stability is excellent. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks mediocre against rivals.

Margins score: 1.3

  • CDZI profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually very poor. They stand bottom tier against rival companies.
  • Business profit on sales tends to be pauper. It's last-in-rank when measured against competitors.
  • Profits on sales made -available to repay debt and purchase properties- are usually destitute. They remain a disappointment compared to peers.
  • Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- tend to be pauper in relation to total revenues. They're still bottom tier against similar companies.
  • Profits -before income taxes- are usually destitute considering total sales, and remain last-in-rank when measured against rivals.
  • Total net profit tends to be pauper when confronted to sales. Company stands last-in-rank when measured against comparable firms.

Growth score: 1.1

  • Cadiz Inc. profit -on goods and services sold- has been shrinking. It's been in a very weak position compared to competitors.
  • In recent years, the firm hasn't always been able to profit from operations, which has been bottom tier against comparable firms.
  • In past years, the company couldn't always turn a profit -available to repay debt and purchase properties-, which compares last-in-rank when measured against peer enterprises.
  • In the previous years, the firm couldn't always make a profit -before income taxes and interests on loans taken-. It turns to be a disappointment compared to similar stocks.
  • In past years, at least once the company lost money -before income taxes-. It was bottom tier against rivals.
  • In the previous years, the firm had at least a total net loss, and last-in-rank when measured against peer companies.
  • The company lost money at least once in the past years. It's been a disappointment compared to industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 1.0

  • CDZI had still to pay income taxes, even though in recent past years mostly lost money. It's been bottom tier against peers.
  • The company does not report R&D expenses. It's meaningless to measure in relation to competitors.
  • We have insufficient data to estimate how effective is research and development effort. It stands unknown against rival companies.

Profitability score: 3.0

  • Cadiz Inc. usually gets meagre returns on the resources it controls. It proves last-in-rank when measured against peer firms.
  • Due to insufficient track history, we were unable to estimate typical returns on invested capital (ROIC). They remain undisclosed in relation to similar companies.
  • Normal return on equity (ROE) is unavailable at this time, because of not enough yearly inputs to calculate. It ranks unknown against competitors.
  • In the past, got meagre returns -on the tangible resources it controls-. This metric is usually related to the industry in which operates and combines profitability versus reinvestment needs. It's last-in-rank when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 4.9

  • CDZI on average doesn't generate genuine funds, so to buy or replace property, plants and equipment must either burn existing cash or increase debt. It stands last-in-rank when measured against rival firms.
  • The company is usually heavily investing in new property, plant, and equipment, to expand its operating capabilities, which is more than average in relation to industry peers.
  • There was no available information regarding dividend yield. It came unknown against competitors.
  • The company pays no dividend, so measuring its growth is meaningless. The company has behaved in an conservative way compared to similar firms.
  • As no dividends are paid, it is useless trying to estimate their sustainability in time. Sustainability looks not applicable in regard to comparable companies.
  • The company has significantly enlarged the pool of investors in previous years, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains a disappointment compared to peer enterprises.
  • Repurchase effectiveness metric is very complex. Run again in analytical mode if you're interested in a technical explanation. It stands in a very weak position compared to rivals.
  • We do not have sufficient data to comment on buybacks and their sustainability. It still looks dubious against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 4.2

  • Cadiz Inc. intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a small portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books. It isn't that a significant risk of liquidating them if the company ever gets in financial distress. It happens to be below average when measured against peer companies.
  • The company has a lot more short-term resources than short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns are most likely irrelevant. It turns to be a slight improvement compared to similar firms.
  • Most resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have more claims on the company than shareholders. Unless the company is a financial institution that takes deposits, the situation might be very risky. It remains bottom tier against rival firms.
  • Controlled resources take time to be turned into cash and equivalents, which is somewhat risky. It looks great when measured against rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has abundant dollars in cash and short-term receivables. It's a slight improvement compared to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has more than enough dollars in cash and equivalents, which is well ranked against similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on somewhat more than three months credit. It still ranks substantially worse when measured against peers.
  • Days of inventory outstanding are not known. It comes up as a big question mark against competitors.
  • We could not gauge the normal operating cycle of the company. It happens to be a mystery against peers.
  • Unfortunately, we had not enough data to estimate the days of payables outstanding. It ranks unknown against industry peers.
  • Cash conversion cycle remains unknown, due to not having enough inputs. It's incomparable against similar companies.
  • Has usually been losing money on the business, so net interest expenses must be paid by increasing borrowings, which is unsustainable in the long run. The situation is very risky for both creditors and shareholders, profitability must increase. It stands bottom tier against rival firms.
  • Business has usually been operated at a loss. Unless prospects improve, the company is no position to decrease loans taken levels but by additional shareholders' funding. Profitability must improve. It ranks last-in-rank when measured against comparable enterprises.
  • The company didn't have revenues in the past twelve months. It must start having income to take advantage of used resources. It looks a disappointment compared to similar firms.
  • The firm has yet to start reporting any sales. It's still bottom tier against peer companies.

Valuation score: 2.5

  • Cadiz Inc. reported losses, so valuating it in relation to earnings is meaningless. It happens to be last-in-rank when measured against competitors.
  • Price-to-Tangible-Book-Value is a fairly complex metric. Run again in analytical mode if you're interested in a technical explanation. It remains rather normal in relation to peers.
  • In the past twelve months, the company consumed funds. Either it reinvested in the business or genuine fund generation might be challenging, which stands bottom tier against similar companies.
  • The company usually consumes more funds than can genuinely generate. Business needs are meet by borrowing money or consuming preexistent cash, which can only keep up until a certain limit. Unless the company is driving business growth, genuine profitability may be brought into question. It's still last-in-rank when measured against industry firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the company has largely enlarged the pool of investors by issuing new shares. Future profits need to be high enough to justify the measure, as the pie of earnings will now be split among a lot more stockholders. It came up a disappointment compared to peer ventures.
  • The company is largely indebted. It should focus on loan repayment before rewarding stockholders. It looks bottom tier against similar enterprises.
  • Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation has been negative, as the company lost money. It ranks last-in-rank when measured against peer companies.
  • Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a huge relationship. The stock price might rely more on expectations and resources controlled than on anything else. It looks a disappointment compared to rival firms.
  • The relation between the stock price and accounting book value is significantly high, which may be good or bad depending on context. Run again in analytic mode if you want to dig deeper. The company remains slightly worse than peer firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the operating business lost significant money. It happens to be last-in-rank when measured against industry peers.
  • In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown a low earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. It's still a disappointment compared to peer companies.

Total score: 3.2


CDZI logos

Company at a glance: Cadiz Inc. (CDZI)

Sector, industry: Utilities, Utilities—Regulated Water

Market Cap: 0.12 billions

Revenues TTM: unavailable

Cadiz Inc., together with its subsidiaries, operates as a natural resources development company in the United States. It engages in the water resource and agricultural development activities in San Bernardino County properties. The company owns approximately 35,000 acres of land in the Cadiz and Fenner valleys of eastern San Bernardino County; and approximately 11,000 acres of land in the eastern Mojave Desert portion of San Bernardino County. It is also involved in the cultivation of lemons, and spring and fall plantings of vegetables and grains. Cadiz Inc. was founded in 1983 and is headquartered in Los Angeles, California.

Awarener score: 4.0

Conclusion

The higher the Awarener score, the more bang you get for the buck. It measures how much genuine funds the company generates for the stock price paid (Poor), the business stability (Excellent) and growth (Average), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Very poor).